A scoping review of theories and conceptual frameworks used to analyse health financing policy processes in sub-Saharan Africa

Author:

Jones Catherine M1ORCID,Gautier Lara23ORCID,Ridde Valéry4

Affiliation:

1. London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Health, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK

2. Département de Gestion, d’Évaluation et de Politique de Santé, École de Santé Publique de l'Université de Montréal, 7101 Avenue du Parc, Montréal, QC H3N 1X9, Canada

3. Centre de recherche en santé publique, Université de Montréal et CIUSSS du Centre-Sud-de-l’Île-de-Montréal, 7101 avenue du Parc, Montréal, QC H3N 1X9, Canada

4. Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Centre Population et Développement - CEPED (IRD-Université de Paris), Université de Paris ERL INSERM SAGESUD, 45 rue des Saints-Peres, Paris 75006, France

Abstract

Abstract Health financing policies are critical policy instruments to achieve Universal Health Coverage, and they constitute a key area in policy analysis literature for the health policy and systems research (HPSR) field. Previous reviews have shown that analyses of policy change in low- and middle-income countries are under-theorised. This study aims to explore which theories and conceptual frameworks have been used in research on policy processes of health financing policy in sub-Saharan Africa and to identify challenges and lessons learned from their use. We conducted a scoping review of literature published in English and French between 2000 and 2017. We analysed 23 papers selected as studies of health financing policies in sub-Saharan African countries using policy process or health policy-related theory or conceptual framework ex ante. Theories and frameworks used alone were from political science (35%), economics (9%) and HPSR field (17%). Thirty-five per cent of authors adopted a ‘do-it-yourself’ (bricolage) approach combining theories and frameworks from within political science or between political science and HPSR. Kingdon’s multiple streams theory (22%), Grindle and Thomas’ arenas of conflict (26%) and Walt and Gilson’s policy triangle (30%) were the most used. Authors select theories for their empirical relevance, methodological rational (e.g. comparison), availability of examples in literature, accessibility and consensus. Authors cite few operational and analytical challenges in using theory. The hybridisation, diversification and expansion of mid-range policy theories and conceptual frameworks used deductively in health financing policy reform research are issues for HPSR to consider. We make three recommendations for researchers in the HPSR field. Future research on health financing policy change processes in sub-Saharan Africa should include reflection on learning and challenges for using policy theories and frameworks in the context of HPSR.

Funder

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada under the project

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3